1 edit
Originally posted by DelmerSurely you remember them broadcasting from Hawaiian beaches, basking in the sun, imploring viewers to send them money so that they could continue to do the lord's work ... and Tammy of the runny mascara would cry ... LOL It seems like yesterday!
Who? (How quickly we forget.)
Originally posted by KneverKnightLOL! Yes, and the Christian Theme Park...
Surely you remember them broadcasting from Hawaiian beaches, basking in the sun, imploring viewers to send them money so that they could continue to do the lord's work ... and Tammy of the runny mascara would cry ... LOL It seems like yesterday!
Originally posted by no1marauderThis can't go unchallenged.
He is a prominent supporter of this right-wing administration which is presently trying to change the long standing rules of the US Senate to get right-wing judges on the Federal bench.
The "right wing" is currently considering changing the rules just so that a 214 year tradition can't be trashed by the left. Never... with the exception of Abe Fortus in 1968? has the "Threat"... and pay attention to the word -- the threat of filibuster been used IN COMMITTEE to prevent the senate from voting on a nominee.
The reason the left is all crazy on this is that NOW is the only time in the history of the nation they are losers in the house, the senate and the administrative branch. They don't know how to react.
All -- let me shout it for the mindwiped -- ALL THAT THE RIGHT WANTS is the same vote in the senate ... up or down, yea or nea, yes or no -- that every nominee in the last 214 years has received. A vote.
What a concept. Who would have thought that to allow a vote of the majority was "radical"? I'll tell you who. Damned dumb lefties.
Do you know why Abe Fortus was threatened with the filibuster?
Hell. What am I asking. There ain't 1 in a hundred on this site who even knows what a filibuster is.
Anyway. Fortus was under indictment for a couple of felonies. Johnson owed a debt. By getting him on the high court, the charges had to be dropped. A corrupt act by a corrupt man. See Viet Nam.
The funny part is that it was prominent "Democrats" doing the filibuster. Jackson of Washington was a leader.
There is only one real advantage to being old. I remember this stuff.
Anyway. If we must "change" the rule of law so that majority rules... so be it. The constitution says nothing about "60% rules". Ever.
The interesting part is that repubs are too stupid to just jump all over the children of the left. Let's have a damned vote folks. Just like we have ALWAYS done on judicial nominations. Save the filibuster for "enactment of law". IT HAS NEVER BEEN USED TO BLOCK NOMINATIONS. EVER. UNTIL NOW. BECAUSE FRIGHTENED CHILDREN DON'T KNOW HOW TO LOSE GRACEFULLY. WE THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. LET OUR JUDGES FREE!